Definitely. I also checked them out and read some comparisons but it seems like people preferred the Z6. It has had many firmware updates since its launch, as recent as last year, I wonder if the autofocus got improved over time. That said, my goal is mostly to use manual lenses so it wouldn’t be much of an issue 
1 Like
Where do you live? Where i live we already got the low quality journalism, 90 percent junk (and being replaced by AI), 9 percent medium quality, and about 1 percent good to outstanding. And only the last group need someone knowing how to use a camera - for the others stock photos are good enough.
Besides… you don’t need award-winning photos for the average article on a news site, you just need one or two, which you get if the journalist makes a thousand pictures. The current AI based photo culling software is perfectly able to get recognize people pictures of decent quality, and the AI based editing software does the rest. Try a demo of one the current culling software systems, if you don’t believe me - they do the job (“decent quality” pictures, nothing award-winning).
1 Like
I live in Stockholm. I know lots of journalists so have some insight in how things have changed but already when people my age started working it was pretty bad.
I agree that a writer is almost certainly never going to get photos at the level of some of the excellent photojournalists at places that I’ve worked (a long time ago). Still, someone has to pay for those photographers/videographers and that’s quite tough when hardly anyone wants to pay for news full stop. Having said that, I thought the freelancer’s pics were certainly good enough for feature stories.
https://jancamenzindbroomby.com/photos
One thing I suspect also, with my limited knowledge, is that stills may be an essential element of a story but in fact text has become more important in getting web views on anything but breaking news. Basically, search engine optimisation is king. Even that may be falling apart thanks to AI summaries.
Adding: by chance saw this post by an LA Times veteran editor just now:
Is there lots of “angst”? As I’m the one who started this thread, I want to emphasize that this is not an issue keeping me up at night or causing me any kind of real misery. I just wanted to discuss it because I feel there is a big emphasis on video right now and I wasn’t sure if it truly reflected market demand or whether it was due to the rising power of the influencer segment of the market.
The fact that hybrid cameras exist and are the norm is a good thing. I’m perfectly happy for all my cameras to have video functionality. It makes sense for both options to be available, and I don’t see much sense in removing video.
If I have a wish, and it’s still nothing that causes me distress, it’s that more stills-focused compact cameras were made. It seems that the compact segment is very much aimed at vloggers at the moment. It’s a big generalization, but it’s as if manufacturers have decided that big cameras (FF, MF) are best for stills, whereas compact cameras are for vlogging. They’re all hybrids, of course, but this is a general trend, and there are technical reasons for it (the larger the sensor, the slower the readout speeds).
This isn’t a problem if the camera is a true multi-purpose hybrid, but if the camera is clearly aimed at vloggers, decisions are made that affect the features and ergonomics of the camera, such as a flip-out screen, tally light, HDMI ports, no EVF, microphones, dedicated buttons, stacked sensors, etc. not to mention the associated accessories made for them.
So, yes, I can buy any camera these days and get good stills and video performance, which is great. But if I don’t shoot video much, I would rather have my camera finely tuned for the best possible stills performance. And if I want a compact camera, I feel there are fewer options available that suit my preferences than with larger format cameras.
But I’m just one person, and I would never assume that the market should bend to my will 
3 Likes
I don’t. Who mentioned ‘recent?’ I can’t afford a ‘recent’ camera - glad to see you find that amusing. Anyhow, I don’t think a ‘recent’ camera with better video capabilities (that I have no use for at all) will improve my photography one little bit. And I still think my thoughts should be no less valid than those who are lucky enough to have the means to buy the latest kit.
So… regardless… and again… I would prefer a nice little camera that is dedicated to still photography - no video. That’s all I wanted to say.
Yes, like that. 
I will go away now and take a few shots, while mothers recoil in horror and shout out loudly “Sheild your eyes, children! Don’t look, for your souls be damned by the hideous site of that retched photographer with the cursed 11-year-old camera!” while similtaneously throwing stones in my general direction. 
“Shame!” [bell tolls] “Shame!”
@martbetz it was based on your reply, where he mentioned recent cameras. I’m sure it wasn’t meant in a bad way
The X-T1 is a great camera and that 16MP sensor is magical to this day.
2 Likes
Ah, yes… ‘recent’ was mentioned. My mistake. Well, on my budget, that’s as recent as it gets, I’m affraid.
3 Likes
The X-T1 is a fine photo camera. I said “recent” only because we were discussing market forces that shape cameras today.
2 Likes
The one thing that makes me wonder is: why are they all using still image cameras to shoot videos, instead of dedicated video cameras? Is it because with modern electronics video cameras would look a lot like cameras anyway? But TV reporters seem to still use things that look like dedicated cameras? Are the dedicated video cameras keeping the old shape because they still use tape so it’s only a matter of time before they all switch?
1 Like
TV reporters most likely need special features like integrated audio, video transmission, super zooms integrated into the camera (and smaller sensors to allow that) etc. They don’t have time to change the lens 
This is changing with Canon C, Sony FX, etc…
2 Likes
This was the impact of the “Canon shock” of 2008.
In 2008, Canon released the EOS 5D Mark II, the first camera equipped with HD video recording capabilities. This made it possible to shoot video footage of the same quality as professional video cameras costing several times the price, so low-budget independent filmmakers began using the camera to shoot their movies, and even TV stations began using it to shoot TV programs.
1 Like
Canon C is actually something really really old
2 Likes
I have seen these used many times in my past job at the University by professionals. Mirrorless Canons would only be an improvement on a D-SLR camera doing videos. My Canon R7 is capable of good quality 4K video. The 4K can be sampled from the whole frame area of the crop sensor or just the required pixel number from the centre of the frame which gives it incredible reach with telephoto lenses when doing wildlife or spying on the neighbours.
3 Likes
In answer to the title: of my four cameras, only one does video which I’ve never used … and my phone has no camera.
So no.
4K is nice, but it has been available for a long, long time, even in consumer compacts. Eg Panasonic had it for ages now, since the GH4.
Cameras become applicable for “serious” video with 10-bit log modes, which is also widely available now (each manufacturer has its own name for the feature). This gives you a lot of latitude for color grading and editing later.
I wish 10 or 12-bit log profiles for still images became a thing. For 99% of my use cases, a nice JPEG XL with a log profile would be sufficient. Most users could dispense with raw entirely.
This is a very interesting discussion. I shot pictures only, then I tried a lot of video but with very little good results. Now I am back to only images but I really, really want to expand my portfolio to a hybrid product. I still want the still images (mainly for print) but I also want to tell the story around the image. Not for everyone but for family and friends. Somehow like Thomas heaton maybe. Just a bit of story around how an image was captured or how a trip went. I think this could be interesting.
2 Likes
Not by me. I bought my (now “old”) Canon 850D in late 2020 and I’ve shot a grand total of about 10 seconds video with it. And that 10 was just to see if it worked. If I was an “influencer” that might be different but I can’t even influence my wife… who am I kidding? 
6 Likes
I have tried to create something that I call “a photo walk”:
Nothing fancy but I think you can get a feeling for what I want to do. My basic intention is to keep my audience for a bit longer engaged than 20s … what is their usual attention span for my photos.
Let me know what you think of this idea.
1 Like
Very nice, but really you should just use your own voice.
2 Likes